Yes, it does try to protect itself from harm, as it should. If you don't know how or why something is, you've no business doing anything to it.
Collectivism and fascism have a lot in common. Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Soviet Union proved that in WWII.
The bugginess of free software causes even more problems though.
The bugginess of commercial software made me ecstatic to find free software, in '93. I've also watched clients choose products based on features advertised as current which didn't work until years later.
This entire story points out only one of the massive flaws in one (or a few) commercial software package(s). You should lose your prejudice. Here's one for you: perl vs. Java.
... based on obsolete knowledge from before 2008 and from expired copies not giving the right protection.
Meanwhile, free software ticks along happily needing none of this BS. Funny that.
If they made it good they'd just get hit with an antitrust lawsuit.
Yeah, and considering what happened last time, that'll have 'em shaking in their boots.
"Baseline performance" and "failing miserably while lieing to customers" don't mean the same thing. Not catching zero-days is one thing. Only catching ca. 30% is worse than flipping a coin.
Make it publicly available instead of DRM controlled publications or services.
I suspect those publications and services are among the few things pushing this in the other direction. Multiple reviewers, each with their own copy of the data and, as they'd be in the same field of research as the author(s), more likely to be personally familiar with the authors' current work and location.
Is that irony? I never have managed to figure that one out.
If Zuckerberg is 50% as sleezy as depicted in "The Social Network",
Not that I'm defending him, but you do know that was a Hollywood production, yes? When have that bunch *ever* portrayed an actual event with any degree approaching accuracy?
I know, f-ing Republicans and the tea-party nanny state. I'm doing my part by voting Democrat across the board.
You should seek professional help. Damn, some of you Yanquis are mixed up.
LibreOffice 4.1 , Handling Rollbacks This isn't unique to LibreOffice 4.1, because it's happened going back all the way back to OpenOffice 1.1. Whenever you get a patch or even more so, whenever you get a major release there are always issues where documents don't work correctly. I keep all of the old versions on the server and can always test and find the regression. Standard procedure then is to rollback a user until we get a patch and then upgrade them again to the latest release. This was done by me, with hard coded scripts. I put this into the support portal and now anyone in IT can either roll their own account back or rollback another user to solve these types of problems.
Why the fuck do the the talk radio assholes
wtf is anyone who can think listening to (your description!) talk radio assholes?
FYI, that's from 2001.
Didn't this take over 10 years?
From TFS: "Ten years after the decision to switch, the LiMux project will now go into regular operation, the Munich City council said."" So, yes, it took 'em about a decade to dig themselves out of that hole. Sad, but true.
It's an interesting metric to go by as well. Going proprietary means a large investment in cash and related tangibles, but not many consider how much time it wastes to get away from it. I know junkies who've been on methadone that long.
Citing the existence of a directory
I was answering his, "How many people have already dispensed with a separate
Caring about what goes in what filesystem is neck-beardy.
Using "neck-beardy" as an epithet is far worse, !@#hole.
How many people have already dispensed with a separate
You've never run Debian; gotcha. See